In a move that could spawn copycat tactics across Africa and beyond, three Kenyan LGBT rights groups have petitioned a court in Nairobi to scrap those legal clauses and grant LGBT Kenyans the same rights to privacy, equality and dignity as other Kenyans. If the groups succeed, Kenya would be the second country in Africa — after South Africa — to do so.

Court hearings in February and March pitted ardent activists against those who believe that Christianity, the majority faith here, is more in line with inherent local values than what they see as a pernicious Western import: homosexuality.

The latter group says it represents not just the values of most Kenyans but of most Africans, and it has funded its own polls to provide proof, using the surveys to argue that Kenya’s courts should respect the “moral majority.” In this view, which is often echoed by prominent government officials, gay sex is unnatural, un-African and unconstitutional in a country that is 83 percent Christian and that cites God in its law and national anthem.

The LGBT rights groups have argued that the case is about basic human rights.

“There are times when the court has to be the trailblazer and teach society,” said Paul Muite, a renowned lawyer representing the National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. “This is one of those times.”

At its core, the dispute stems from what was known in British law as the “sodomy offense,” which criminalized “carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature.” The prohibition has bedeviled LGBT people across the former British Empire for more than a century.

Like most former British colonies, Kenya has retained portions of the crown’s Victorian-era penal code, including vaguely worded clauses against gay sex. The legal verbiage was coined in 1860 for Britain’s colony in India and tweaked in 1899 in Queensland, Australia, to encompass all kinds of “indecent practices between males.” It was then reproduced across the seven seas.

In fact, more than half of the nearly 80 countries in the world that criminalize gay sex inherited those laws from the British Empire. Those same laws were overturned in the United Kingdom between 1967 and 1982.

The presiding judges in the Kenyan case have adjourned until April 26, when they will announce a date to reveal their judgment. Muite said that even if the judges rule in his favor, two subsequent rounds of appeals, ending in the Supreme Court, could last a year or more.

Men stand in the street outside a club in downtown Nairobi on March 16, 2018. (Adriane Ohanesian/For The Washington Post)

The mood in Kenya’s LGBT community is anxious but buoyant — perhaps nowhere more so than among those who are routinely singled out as offenders: male sex workers. Although few are sent to jail for violating Section 162, as the law banning gay sex is known, it is commonly used as a pretext by police for harassment and worse.

Some male sex workers said in interviews that their peers have been raped in police stations and told it was done to “correct us.” Before a court ruling in March, police here could force those suspected of having had gay sex to undergo anal examinations. But most commonly, the sex workers said, the law is used to extort money from them.

On a recent night in downtown Nairobi, a police officer collected his weekly bribe from a group of male sex workers gathered in a sweaty drinking hole they call “the Sauna.”

The men scrape out a living by propositioning mostly closeted bargoers and the occasional expat. Substance abuse is rife. The Sauna’s owner, who gave her name only as Mama Lucy, does a brisk trade in $2 bottles of Chrome Vodka, but other vices are no more than a call away. Despite the bribes — and occasional drunken brawls — it is a place of refuge filled with music, shared drinks, selfie poses and wide grins.

Nearly each face in the Sauna, though, bore scars from encounters with police, angry neighbors or family members who disapproved of their sexuality. Section 162 is often the justification for private acts of violence.

“I’m not tired of being beaten,” said Mombo Ngua, 29, who goes by the nickname Mantully. “Freedom is worth that, for sure.”

Mantully’s scar, which bisects his right eyebrow, came from when a neighbor falsely accused him of raping his 4-year-old son.

Mombo Ngua, 29, who is also known as Mantully, makes a phone call in a bar where he drinks with other male sex workers before going out for the night in Nairobi on March 16, 2018. (Adriane Ohanesian/For The Washington Post)

“The police punched me before even asking what happened. I’m lucky to still have my eye,” he said. “But I’m used to police stations now. You can say I’m a member there.”

Others at the Sauna are bothered less by the threat of physical violence than the indignity of discrimination.

“This ‘against the order of nature’ thing is ridiculous,” said a sex worker who gave his name as Simon Flavor, as he claimed to have introduced flavored condoms to Kenya.

As the sex workers left the Sauna for “hot spots” where they pick up customers along Tom Mboya Street, many lamented that same-sex love in Kenya seemed impossible. Life was a continuous cycle of extortion by police and blackmail by customers who would threaten them with the law to avoid paying. Worse still was the specter of HIV. Many gay men in Kenya do not get tested out of fear that they will be prosecuted.

“When we win this case, so many men will finally come out,” Mantully said. “And they will get tested. It is not about decriminalizing this or that. It is about survival.”

In some ways, Kenya is more tolerant of LGBT rights than neighboring countries. Uganda, for instance, gained international notoriety for a proposed law that would mete out the death sentence for gay sex. Tanzania cracked down last year, arresting a dozen LGBT activists and advocates. People who call themselves “refugees” from both countries come to Nairobi to feel at least a bit more free.

Then again, Kenya’s vice president, William Ruto, has said there is “no room” for gays in Kenya. Ezekiel Mutua, who directs Kenya’s film board and decides what is permissible on television, went on an anti-gay rant on Facebook in March.

“No gay content will air on our screens under our watch. You can make all the noise to hell and back. I don’t care who is behind these groups,” Mutua wrote. “I have only one thing to say: You will not be allowed to destroy our children. Your foreign masters have ruined their countries, and they now want to use a few characters to introduce that filth here in Kenya.”

Disdain for LGBT people is widespread in Kenya. While openly gay sex workers encounter all sorts of threats, most LGBT Kenyans face a more quotidian repression from the concentric rings of family, church and society that see them as confused at best and at worst diseased or irredeemable. While LGBT activists in Kenya largely accept that a change in the law will not immediately change society, they think it will be a turning point.

“Kenya would be seen as a real first for many,” said Neela Ghoshal, a researcher on LGBT rights at Human Rights Watch, based in Nairobi. “South Africa has always been seen as the exception to the African rule on most fronts.”

Legal precedents have been set in Kenya against discrimination on the basis of sexuality. The National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission had to fight in the courts for its right to name itself that, and its win two years ago was cited in judgments in Botswana and Uganda in similar cases. A court in Botswana is hearing a petition to scrap that country’s version of Section 162.

A visiting pastor leads a service at the Cosmopolitan Affirming Church in Nairobi on March 18, 2018. (Adriane Ohanesian/For The Washington Post)

No such change will happen, however, if Charles Kanjama, a lawyer for the Kenya Christian Professionals Forum, has his way. To him, the decriminalization of gay sex in Kenya would be a new form of “cultural imperialism.”

“We consider them as enemies of the natural family,” he said on a recent night in his downtown Nairobi office. “Luckily in Africa, we take comfort in the Christian truth, which is that God detests homosexuality. Living that way is living in error. To them I say: Repent, do not sin again, and you will be forgiven.”

As for the violence experienced by Kenyans who identify as LGBT, Kanjama said it was “unfortunate” and that he does not condone it.

Back on Tom Mboya Street, the Sunday congregation of Cosmopolitan Affirming Church had a different interpretation of the gospel. The pews — really just a few rows of banquet hall chairs — were filled with gay men. A few familiar faces from the Sauna were there.

John Karare, a minister in training, led them in a call-and-response prayer.

World News Email Alerts

Breaking news from around the world.

“Even when they say gays cannot worship God, who has the final say?” he called. “Jehovah has the final say,” they responded.

“Even when they push us out of their churches by force, who has the final say?”“Jehovah has the final say.”Washington Post

August 17, 2013

EScott Lively evangelical minister, founder and president of Abiding Truth Ministries, must face claims that he conspired in the persecution of gay and lesbian Ugandans, advocating that they face the death penalty, a federal judge ruled. Sexual Minorities Uganda is an umbrella organization whose members advocate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people in the East African country. It claims Scott Lively, president of Abiding Truth Ministries and self-described expert on the "gay movement," has conspired to commit crimes against humanity by persecuting LGBTI people and campaigning for a Ugandan law that would make homosexuality punishable by death. Lively's ministry is based in Springfield, Mass. Lively's campaign began after the Ugandan High Court affirmed that LGBTI persons enjoy basic protections of the law in 2008. Their 2012 complaint states: "Lively's 2009 work in Uganda and his call to arms to fight against an 'evil' and 'genocidal', 'pedophilic' 'gay movement', which he likened to the Nazis and Rwandan murderers, ignited a cultural panic and atmosphere of terror that radically intensified the climate of hatred in which Lively's goals of persecution could advance. Shortly after Lively's pivotal 2009 work in Uganda, one member of Parliament expressed, 'We must exterminate homosexuals before they exterminate society.' "Among the shocking, repressive measures undertaken after 2009, is the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill (also referred to as the 'Kill the Gays Bill'), which proposed the death penalty for a second conviction of consensual sex between adults of the same gender, and imprisonment for failure to report on others suspected of being 'homosexual', and for advocacy in any way on issues related to homosexuality. While Lively has half-heartedly tried to distance himself from the death penalty provision of the bill, he still considers it the 'lesser of two evils' as compared to recognizing the humanity of LGBTI individuals or permitting their speech or advocacy. "In 2010, a tabloid newspaper - parroting characterizations of gays and lesbians repeatedly made to Ugandan officials by Lively - published an article 'outing' SMUG [Sexual Minorities Uganda] advocacy officer David Kato (and others), under the headline, 'Hang Them'. Four months later, Mr. Kato was bludgeoned to death in his home. On Feb. 14, 2012, a private training on human rights and public health conducted by SMUG and one of its member organizations was raided by Ugandan government officials who declared the gathering 'illegal' and called those gathered there 'terrorists.' The member organization's executive director had to flee in order to avoid arrest and detention." Homosexuality in Uganda is currently punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor refused to dismiss the allegations against Lively, permitting the case to move forward. "Plaintiff has stated a claim for persecution that amounts to a crime against humanity, based on a systematic and widespread campaign of persecution against LGBTI people in Uganda," Ponsor wrote. "The allegations feature defendant's active involvement in well orchestrated initiatives by legislative and executive branch officials and powerful private parties in Uganda, including elements of the media, to intimidate LGBTI people and to deprive them of their fundamental human rights to freedom of expression, life, liberty, and property." The judge called it "utterly specious" for Lively to argue that his actions did not violate international norms because LGBTI people face discrimination all over the world. "The history and current existence of discrimination against LGBTI people is precisely what qualifies them as a distinct targeted group eligible for protection under international law," Ponsor wrote. "The fact that a group continues to be vulnerable to widespread, systematic persecution in some parts of the world simply cannot shield one who commits a crime against humanity from liability," the 79-page opinion said. Lively's alleged conduct additionally may not qualify as free speech because "it is well-established that speech that constitutes criminal aiding and abetting is not protected by the First Amendment," the judge added. Ponsor clarified: "In making this decision, the court is mindful of the chilling effect that can occur when potential tort liability is extended to unpopular opinions that are expressed as part of a public debate on policy. However, at this stage, the amended complaint sets out plausible claims to hold defendant liable for his role in systematic persecution, rather than merely for opinions that plaintiff finds abhorrent." In response to the decision, defense attorney Horatio Mihet told Courthouse News: "We are disappointed that the lawsuit's been allowed to move forward because we believe that it is foreclosed by the First Amendment and by the Supreme Court's decision in the Kiobel[v. Royal Dutch Petroleum] case. This was decided in April and the court decided that the Alien Tort Statute cannot be used to bring claims for events that happened outside of the U.S." "We're still evaluating the court's opinion, and we're determined to continue to fight for Mr. Lively's constitutional rights, and we're confident that ultimately he will prevail," Mihet said. Mihet works for Liberty Counsel, a firm "dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family," according to its website. Pam Spees with the Center for Constitutional Rights meanwhile applauded the ruling. "We are gratified that the court recognized the persecution and the gravity of the danger faced by our clients as a result of Scott Lively's actions," Spees said in a statement. "Lively's single-minded campaign has worked to criminalize their very existence, strip away their fundamental rights and threaten their physical safety.”courthousenews.com

April 9, 2013

Setting up a mock gallows with a dummy on a rope, about 25 Lebanese human rights activists protest outside the Saudi embassy in Beirut on April 1, 2010 against capital punishment as Lebanon's envoy to Riyadh said he has yet to be informed of a Saudi decision to behead a Lebanese former TV presenter convicted of sorcery. The United Nations says Saudi Arabia has seen a sharp rise in executions in 2011. (ANWAR AMRO/AFP/Getty Images)

Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Justice issued a series of tweets denying reports that a prisoner was to be paralyzed by the authorities for having allegedly paralyzing someone, describing the account as "untrue," according to CNN.

Apparently, the paralysis measure was actually considered -- the judge "dismissed requests for such punishment," said the ministry, reported CNN.

"We hope that everyone attempts to verify the facts and be accurate," the ministry added.

January 9, 2013

Saudi Arabia drew widespread censure today as it ignored personal pleas from the Sri Lankan President and executed a migrant worker for the death of a baby in her care, despite her being a minor at the time of the crime.

The news of the beheading – which was followed by a minute’s silence in the Sri Lankan parliament – came as Colombo was preparing to send an emergency delegation to Saudi Arabia in a last-ditch attempt for a resolution. The Sri Lankan President President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who had written to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz to appeal for clemency, said he “deplored” the decision.

The daughter of a woodcutter from a small village in eastern Sri Lanka, Rizana Nafeek was 17 when the four-month-old baby in her care died, meaning the execution is in breach of an international treaty to protect children to which Saudi Arabia is a signatory. Amnesty International said the execution showed that the religiously conservative kingdom, which executed 79 people last year, is “woefully out of step with international standards on the death penalty”.

The case once again throws a spotlight on the vulnerability of migrant workers in the country and their treatment under its legal system – where human rights groups say access to adequate translation and legal assistance is severely limited. Rights groups raised concerns about the fairness of the trail as Ms Nafeek was denied access to legal representation and adequate translation.

Indonesia last year banned its nationals from working in Saudi Arabia, when a maid was beheaded after confessing to killing her employer, claiming he abused her.

Tales of mistreatment are all too common. Two years ago, a 49-year-old maid returned from Saudi Arabia her body studded with iron nails which had been driven into her flesh by her employer – she said she was afraid he would slit her throat if she screamed as they were hammered in. Surgeons removed 23 nails and needles from her body when she returned home, though Saudi authorities reject her story.

Like many of the Gulf’s migrant workers Ms Nafeek’s parents say they were forced to send her overseas to supplement the struggling family’s income. They say the employment agency forged her documents to make it appear she was an adult and could legally seek employment in the oil-rich Gulf state. Her passport says she was born in February 1982, but rights groups claim she was not allowed to present her birth certificate or other evidence of her age to the court during her trial in 2007.

Ms Nafeek had been in the country for a matter of weeks when the baby in her care in the town of Dawadmi died in 2005. The Saudi Interior Ministry say that she smothered the child after an argument with her employer and that the sentence was carried out “legitimately and honestly”. The maid initially admitted to the crime but later retracted her confession saying it had been extracted under duress, saying the baby had choked on milk.

“One issue that we have continuously highlighted is the treatment of migrant workers in Saudi Arabia, not only at the hands of their employers who mistreat them, refuse salaries and refuse time off, but also at the hands of the authorities,” said Dina El-Mamoun, Saudi Arabia researcher at Amnesty International. “When migrant workers come into contact with the law they are often dealt with harshly and not given their rights, despite being the most vulnerable section of society.”

The execution coincided with an International Labour Organisation report which urged nations to urgently adopt and implement new laws to protect domestic workers, with just 10 per cent given the same legal protection as other workers. “The lack of rights, the extreme dependency on an employer and the isolated and unprotected nature of domestic work can render them vulnerable to exploitation and abuse,” the report said.

November 19, 2012

An Aymara woman walks in the Villa Ingenio cemetery in El Alto, 25 km west of La Paz, on November 2, 2011, during the religious festivity of the Day of the Dead, also known as All Souls Day in Bolivia. (AIZAR RALDES/AFP/Getty Images)

{There is also an unconfirmed report out there that Texas is going to return to the Joan o’Arc times and Cut off heads of Evolutionists that are prong to thinking too much.}

Thieves will have their hands amputated and rapists will be chemically castrated under a controversial new law for Bolivia's indigenous people in the city of El Alto.

Trained doctors will be paid to operate on convicted criminals in El Alto after they have been sentenced by a newly created court,according to the New York Daily News. If medical professionals refuse to perform the surgery, indigenous doctors from the rural, highland provinces will be paid to do the work.

Carmelo Titirico, leader of the National Council for Ayllu and Marka People, said the controversial punishment has been approved by the indigenous community "as it's the only way to stop those crimes," the Daily News also reported. "Indigenous justice is handled differently, not between four walls as ordinary justice is. We will not be sending people to jail in these cases."

Titirico noted that the new punishments are protected under Bolivia's "community justice law," reported Fox News. Under President Evo Morales, Bolivia is considered a plurinational state, permitting the existence of multiple political communities and constitutional asymmetry.

He insists that his council won't back down on its ruling, even though the measure could lead to widespread anger among the area's indigenous peoples.

The Forest Needs help

Adamfoxie Blog Int. (Click the Fox-please)

Adam Gonzalez, Publisher

ONE 💔

ONE (RED) Join The Campaign Vs.AIDS

Free for Nonprofit

If you are known non-profit dealing with LGBT health issues, world hunger, and some health issues in general, We will give you a free spot showing in all 13 pages of this site. You can contact the publisher at adamfoxie@Gmail.comWe reserve the right to choose how this nonprofit fits this media blogging site